There are, unfortunately, plenty of people that believe that in order to obtain obedience to the state’s policing arm, that the policing authority has to be wielded in such a way, that the people rightly fear the consequences of their bad actions. These types of people and those that implement such, are basically known as the “law and order” type, who do not broker dissent, and thereby believe that a state in which criminal acts are dealt with, quickly and surely, will not only earn the lasting respect of the people, but will substantially reduce the criminal element.
The problem though, with this type of mindset, is that it has been tried again and again, throughout the ages, and though it might well look good in principle, it does not work well in action. The issue that a significant portion of the general population has with a strict law and order state, is that such not only often appears to them as being arbitrary, unfair, overly punitive, as well as concentrating far too frequently on public shaming -- is that a substantial portion of those so suffering the ill effects of this law and order, are being punished in a way and manner that does not often reasonably conform to the nature or the severity of the crime, so committed. Further to the point, those suffering the most from this law and order state, often are those that are the un-championed, the oppressed, and the impoverished, above all – which presupposes that those not so suffering from such, are probably either better connected, or much more devious.
Those then, that have an open mind about policing, understand that policing, in every society and at every time, must be structured in such a way, that it is a two-way street, in which, therefore, there is respect so demonstrated by those doing the policing to the people; in addition to the people showing respect to those that purportedly are there to serve and to protect them. The bottom line is that whenever the general public perceives those that are doing the policing within their neighborhood as something akin to an occupying force, then there is never going to be peace or justice within that neighborhood, no matter how many people are arrested, ever. Rather, in order for the police to function well within any community, that community must have a desire to voluntarily cooperate with the police, so enacted because those people understand the good necessity of having a police force within their community in order to ameliorate bad situations and events that need to be thus addressed in a responsible and coherent fashion.
It is well to remember that there can never be a lasting peace within any community, if the price for that peace, is injustice; for that which is unjust, cannot ever bring a lasting peace. Instead, it has to be recognized that the only legitimate policing force is one that works with, not against, the community that it is serving, of which, it is thereby the responsibility of that community in conjunction with the policing arm to thus build a bridge of rapport, one with another. So then, the difference between good policing and bad, is the difference between that which is supportive of the common good, and that which is destabilizing or destructive to such.